2009 (1) TMI 504 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance - Depreciation - The grievance of the appellant that 40 per cent. depreciation is allowable when in a business motor lorries and motor taxis are used - Delhi High Court in CIT v. Bansal Credits Ltd. reported in 2002 -TMI - 12136 - DELHI High Court) - It is clear that it is the end user of the specified asset which is relevant for determining the percentage of depreciation - Once it is accepted that the leasing out of the vehicles is one of the modes of doing business by the assessee and in fact the income from such leasing is treated as business income of the assessee it would be clearly contradictory in terms to hold that the vehicles in question were not used wholly for the purpose of the assessee s business and the assessee is bound to get the benefit under such Appendix I and thereby should get the benefit of receiving the percentage of depreciation at higher rate which is specified in the said entry at 40 per cent - Accordingly it is decided in the favour of the assessee

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether a disallowance made in an intimation under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 continues to have any existence in the assessment made under section 143(3)?
2. Whether a prima facie adjustment under section 143(1)(a) for depreciation claimed at 40% in terms of Appendix I to the Income-tax Rules is beyond the scope of the power conferred by section 143(1)(a)?
3. Whether depreciation at 40% is admissible for leased motor trucks used in the business of running them on hire?

Issue 1:
The appellant claimed depreciation at 40% on leased vehicles, but the Assessing Officer allowed only 25%. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the appellant's contention and allowed depreciation at 40%. However, the Tribunal reversed this decision, stating that when vehicles are not run by the assessee on hire, the depreciation rate is 30%. The appellant argued that their case was decided without hearing them, and they referenced relevant rules and case law to support their claim.

Issue 2:
The appellant's advocate referred to Appendix I under rule 5 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, which specifies depreciation rates for motor vehicles used in a business of running them on hire. They cited a Delhi High Court decision that upheld higher depreciation rates for businesses leasing out commercial vehicles. The court emphasized that the end user of the asset is crucial in determining the depreciation rate, and leasing out vehicles is considered a mode of doing business, entitling the assessee to higher depreciation rates.

Issue 3:
The court noted that a special leave petition filed against the Delhi High Court decision was dismissed by the Supreme Court, indirectly confirming the higher depreciation rate for businesses leasing out vehicles. They highlighted that the Supreme Court indirectly affirmed the Delhi High Court's decision on depreciation rates for businesses engaged in leasing commercial vehicles. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing depreciation at the claimed rate of 40%.

In conclusion, the High Court of Calcutta allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the entitlement to depreciation at the claimed rate of 40% for leased motor trucks used in the business of running them on hire. The court considered relevant rules, case law, and the nature of the appellant's business in determining the depreciation rate, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant.